Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

LatD
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=17519		 Page 1 of 4
Author:  Steve54 [ Sun Dec 27, 2009 11:28 am ]
Post subject:  LatD
Changes proposals

Defilers, Daemons, Prince will follow or be influenced by the BL threads

Zombies - change to 3+2 D6

This makes them somewhat more reliable as a unit choice - you will get minimum 5 rather than 3.

Thunderbolts+Marauders - drop from list. This will give an incentive to pick the Tzeentch flyers which are a poor choice in direct comparison

Add Invulnerable Save to Daemon Engines that don't have them - Khorne LoB+engines and Plague Tower
Author:  Tiny-Tim [ Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:16 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
Drop cost and abilities of Icon Bearer please.
Author:  frogbear [ Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:59 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
Quote: (Steve54 @ Dec. 27 2009, 19:28 )

Thunderbolts+Marauders - drop from list. This will give an incentive to pick the Tzeentch flyers which are a poor choice in direct comparison

Will this mean that you have to take Tzeentch to get any fliers at all?  Is this not a big change which is trying to be avoided?

Quote: 


Add Invulnerable Save to Daemon Engines that don't have them - Khorne LoB+engines and Plague Tower


Meh. Sounds reasonable.
Author:  hello_dave [ Sun Dec 27, 2009 4:22 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
Weighting up the Defiler changes and how they fit with this list:

Changing the Deflier (for my money at least) makes it tread on the toes of both the Khrone and Slannesh engines, whilst dropping the Thunderbolts promotes the Daemon fliers.

Just to throw a random idea out there (I reckon it'll be shot down in flames), but what about making the Daemon Engines generic? 'Daemonic Fighters', 'Daemonic Artillery' etc. I think the war engine choices could remain god-specific (so no Nurgle-esque lords of battle).

Since most people are going to be proxying / converting their Daemon engines anyway is this such a big deal?
Author:  BlackLegion [ Sun Dec 27, 2009 10:35 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
ALL Daemon Engines have Fearless and Invulnerable Save as a design principle to show that they are daemonic.

A decision i don't fully support.
Author:  Irisado [ Sun Dec 27, 2009 11:14 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
Quote: (hello_dave @ Dec. 27 2009, 15:22 )

Just to throw a random idea out there (I reckon it'll be shot down in flames), but what about making the Daemon Engines generic? 'Daemonic Fighters', 'Daemonic Artillery' etc. I think the war engine choices could remain god-specific (so no Nurgle-esque lords of battle).

Since most people are going to be proxying / converting their Daemon engines anyway is this such a big deal?


For those of us who collected the models at the time and like background, such as myself, this is a big deal, and I do not want to see my wonderful Khorne and Tzeentch Daemon Engines reduced to 'generic' thank you very much, so I do not agree that suggestion at all I'm afraid.

Due to not having any Traitor Navy, I cannot run a direct comparison to Tzeenctch fliers and the Marauder and Thunderbolt, so is the issue one of the Tzeentch Daemons Engines being poor by comparison, or is it just they are too expensive?

As for upgrading all Daemon Engines to have an invulnerable save, I'm not so sure about that, as I suspect most of them which do not have it are probably okay without it.  That said, the way in which invulnerable saves have been allocated seems very odd to me.  It makes sense for the Tzeentch Daemon Engines to have it in my view, but why give it to only one Nurgle and Slaanesh Daemon Engine/War Engine?  This seems very inconsistent to me, and could do with being tidied up in my opinion.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Sun Dec 27, 2009 11:40 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
I agree with tidying up all Daemon Engines to have Invulnerable Saves.
Author:  hello_dave [ Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:07 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
Quote: 


For those of us who collected the models at the time and like background, such as myself, this is a big deal, and I do not want to see my wonderful Khorne and Tzeentch Daemon Engines reduced to 'generic' thank you very much, so I do not agree that suggestion at all I'm afraid.


Fair enough (although that argument does stick two fingers up to any new players...), but if the list is going to lose access to any fliers other than the Tzeentch ones, and the Defilers are going to be yet another choice which is similar to the existing Khrone and Slannesh engines (whilst removing their current artillery function) it would seem to me that the options in the list are being even further restricted by marks taken. All I was suggesting was a way to make the list a little more flexible.
Author:  Irisado [ Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:40 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
Quote: (hello_dave @ Dec. 28 2009, 21:07 )

Fair enough (although that argument does stick two fingers up to any new players...), but if the list is going to lose access to any fliers other than the Tzeentch ones, and the Defilers are going to be yet another choice which is similar to the existing Khrone and Slannesh engines (whilst removing their current artillery function) it would seem to me that the options in the list are being even further restricted by marks taken. All I was suggesting was a way to make the list a little more flexible.

It doesn't necessarily dismiss new players.  To all intents and purposes, I am a new player to this version of the game, as I was playing Space Marine two and Titan Legions until early 2008, what you mean is that it doesn't take account of players who have never played any version of the game before ;), which I do accept is an issue.  That said, there have to be some perks to being a veteran of this hobby, and having models from the Space Marine era is one of them in my view.

I don't see any reason why the Traitor Navy cannot stay.  If the Tzeentch fliers need a boost to make them more competitive by comparison, this could be done, surely?

If you really wanted to, you could add another undivided Daemon Engine of some sort to the rules, in order to compensate for the number of dedicated Daemon Engines, and I would have no objection to this, but I'm just not convinced that it is all that necessary.
Author:  Dobbsy [ Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:55 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
What is the rationale behind Daemon engine inv saves? Just curious.
Author:  BlackLegion [ Mon Dec 28, 2009 11:08 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
They are daaaaaemoooooonic  :evil: .

So i was told at least.
All Daemons are Fearless and have an Invulnerable Save. So Daemon Engines have this too to show how daemonic they are.

That the actual Wh40k rules* make Daemon Engines unaffected by damage results which would affect a crew has nothing to do with it.




*They ignore Crew Stunned and Crew Shaken results. Actually nullifying the penetrating hit that scored any of those results.
Author:  fredmans [ Mon Dec 28, 2009 11:19 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
As a supporter of factions (from the other thread), I am against dropping Traitor Navy formations. Tzeentch is the easiest faction to align with, but it should not be mandatory to include a Tzeentch coven.

@dobbsy: I think Invulnerable Save is meant to represent the demonic nature of daemon engines, being able to withstand massive damage and keep on fighting.

Although it looks haphazard, I think the design issue is a matter of balance. Currently, it is either Reinforced Armour or Invulnerable save, but never both. The result, Daemonic Engines are slightly tougher than normal AV:s. Pasting Invulnerable saves on top of every engine makes the tough ones tougher. Getting rid of Invulnerable saves make the worse engines worse. I say, keep it as it is.

/Fredmans
Author:  Irisado [ Mon Dec 28, 2009 11:22 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
What baffles me though is why some Daemon Engines were given invulnerable saves in Epic though, yet others were not, especially when the decision to allocate the invulnerable saves seems a bit arbitrary.

All the Tzeentch Daemon Engines have an invulnerable save, which does, to my mind, make sense, but how can it be justified that the Undivided Daemon Engines get such saves if the Khorne Daemon Engines do not?  Why do Contagion Towers receive an invulnerable save, yet the mighty Plague Tower does not?  These allocations of invulnerable saves seem very inconsistent to me.
Author:  BlackLegion [ Mon Dec 28, 2009 11:27 pm ]
Post subject:  LatD
As stated above i was under the impression that ALL Daemon Engines have both Fearless and Invulnerable Save.
So to me the discrepancies you mention are only an oversight*.
If not then this would open a whole new can of worms and possibilities.

*That Daemons (Engines) always have both was the reason Lord I proposed an Invulnerable Save to the revised Obliterators because he percieved them as somewhat daemonic regardless that they already had an 4+RA save.
MY proposal removed the Invulnerable Save because a squad of Obliterators isn't more toughter than a squad of Terminators. Obliterators have two Wounds but Terminators are nearly twice as numerous per squad.
Page 1 of 4 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/